Sam Ash Music Store in Capital Blvd in Raleigh does not allow firearms

lol

Methinks Mr Sam Ash Music let Mr Guitar Center know about the letters he's been getting and Mr Guitar Center put them signs up to avoid having to deal with a perceived flood of gun owners visiting his store. The timing is just a little too convenient.

Anyway, it's clear Sam Ash Music could care less whether or not you go there, and also could care less if you go somewhere else.

I smell an opportunity if one would be inclined to open up a guns/ guitars store in the area...

I'm not surprised with the replies Sam Ash has been giving you guys. I used to work for a company that insured checks for Sam Ash. Whenever anyone would decline someone's check, there is an expected attitude from the merchant and customer.

Sam Ash would give us an attitude for days sending their complaint about me up the ladder to their boss's boss's boss. I know for a fact Paul got wind of me one weekend where a store manager called me back multiple times calling me every name in the book. When I told him I had no problem hanging up on him if all he was going to do was try and hurt my feelings he went through the roof! He swore I would be fired.

I wasn't.

I See What You Did There

USNRCorpsman said:

In the law (criminal, property, and tort), when any person enters a property who is not the possessor(owner or one in authority to control), they do so in one of three statuses; as a licensee, as an invitee, or as a tresspasser.
In the case of a retail store, the possessor decides under what conditions (or scope of permission) he or she will allow the public to enter their property. When you, as patron, enter the property having complied with the conditions, you become a "business invitee". With that, the possessor accepts the duty to keep you from harm (inspecting the property for hazzards and advising you of any that exist, rescuing you should some mishap befall you, &c.).
If you enter a property NOT in compliance, you do so without permission. Your status is trespasser. As a trespasser, you meet the definition (both legal and otherwise) of intruder.

Click to expand...

Thanks for all this background. You give a very global explanation. I think this is an important point. I would never bet my freedom that I clearly understand the information you give but it's likely most others on OCDO do follow it clearly.
It seems that you are convinced that walking past a sign is sufficient to make one an intruder. Is it possible to find a citation that points out specifically by the letter of the law that this is so? I think the legal definition is what is needed and any definition otherwise would not apply. So, is intruder defined in the statutes? I failed to find it there. If the statute does not define intruder then what would be the default definition. Again, thank you for this reasoned explanation.

EricDailey X-NRA said:

Thanks for all this background. You give a very global explanation. I think this is an important point. I would never bet my freedom that I clearly understand the information you give but it's likely most others on OCDO do follow it clearly.
It seems that you are convinced that walking past a sign is sufficient to make one an intruder. Is it possible to find a citation that points out specifically by the letter of the law that this is so? I think the legal definition is what is needed and any definition otherwise would not apply. So, is intruder defined in the statutes? I failed to find it there. If the statute does not define intruder then what would be the default definition. Again, thank you for this reasoned explanation.

Click to expand...

Hi Eric,
I'm sorry that I don't have a citation for you. My domestic partner is a student at Charlotte Law School and he explained it to me. You might look up "tresspasser" in Black's or possibly wikipedia. (Black's would be better.)

Definition

USNRCorpsman said:

Hi Eric,
I'm sorry that I don't have a citation for you. My domestic partner is a student at Charlotte Law School and he explained it to me. You might look up "tresspasser" in Black's or possibly wikipedia. (Black's would be better.)

Click to expand...

I think I can rely on the statute, which you see addresses itself to intruders. If you hear someone say otherwise please let us know. I am of the opinion still, that walking past a sign is no violation. I hope to be corrected if I am mistaken. Chances are I'll will be corrected on OCDO or on some property with a sign. I will avoid intruding in any case.

Update

I had occasion to go back to Sam Ash today and I asked to speak with a manager.
After shaking hands I said I wanted to talk to him about the sign on his door and pointed to the No Firearms sign. I asked him why he felt the need to prohibit the lawful carry of firearms in his store. He told me "because we've had people bringing firearms in here and it frightens the other customers".

We politely discussed this for a few minutes and it was obvious that he felt quite strongly about not allowing them if it "even bothered a single person".

I told him that he had every right as the store manager to post the sign and prohibit firearms and that I and every other gun other had every right to take our business elsewhere.

It thanked him for taking the time to discuss it with me. We shook hands and that was it.

It was worth a try.

Good to hear it was civil. Ya can't make everyone see the light.

Greg Bradburn said:

I had occasion to go back to Sam Ash today and I asked to speak with a manager.
After shaking hands I said I wanted to talk to him about the sign on his door and pointed to the No Firearms sign. I asked him why he felt the need to prohibit the lawful carry of firearms in his store. He told me "because we've had people bringing firearms in here and it frightens the other customers".

We politely discussed this for a few minutes and it was obvious that he felt quite strongly about not allowing them if it "even bothered a single person".

I told him that he had every right as the store manager to post the sign and prohibit firearms and that I and every other gun other had every right to take our business elsewhere.

It thanked him for taking the time to discuss it with me. We shook hands and that was it.

It was worth a try.

Click to expand...

Thanks for trying for all of us! Oh well - Musicians' Friend, here I come.

Guitar Center Weasel Words

condeist said:

I just left Guitar Center, which is where I thought i would be doing my music shopping from here on out. Well there is a big sign in the window now, saying ALL weapons are prohibited. I KNEW it wasn't there last time I went there, so I asked the guy how long it has been up and he said about a couple months. I asked why they changed their policy, he said he didnt know and that it was a Corporate decision. So I asked again just to be sure, are you sure this is a corporate policy and not a store policy, and he said yes.

Looks like there is nowhere gun friendly, much less OC friendly, to buy musical merchandise now. Im up for firing off a round of letters, does anyone know how to contact their corporate office?

Click to expand...

=====================================================

I am on Guitar Center's email and mail lists (as a FORMER very good customer), and I clicked on a feedback button in an email to let them know that I would be shopping elsewhere as long as they kept the no guns sign. Here is the response, (apparently written by a team of lawyers and PR folks, judging by all of the doublespeak :banghead:

"Thank you for taking the time to contact us with your concerns. We appreciate your email and do want to clarify some things. Guitar Center has no position or policy on gun ownership, gun rights nor laws relating to guns. We respect the entire United States Constitution, including the Second Amendment which only relates to state action. Our "in-store" policy is in full compliance with the Second Amendment and I can assure you that Guitar Center has no interest in promoting or lobbying for any gun restriction laws. We fully support your right to legally own, carry and use firearms, but if we allow firearms inside our stores, there is no way that we can decide, nationwide, what visitors in our stores are law abiding (like you) and what persons are intending harm. We also strongly feel that other customers cannot discern another customer's intent if they observe others in the store bearing arms while shopping. We feel that we provide a safe environment in our stores and do not feel that our customers have to have undue worry about self defense while shopping. To my knowledge no one has ever had a need to use a firearm inside one of our stores. We hope that you will reconsider your position on shopping with us as we fully respect your feelings and rights and trust that you will understand that our policy is in full conformance with all laws and your rights. If you have other questions, please let me know.

Thanks again,

Annie Biggerstaff
Customer Service
818.735.8800 x2601"

"but if we allow firearms inside our stores, there is no way that we can decide, nationwide, what visitors in our stores are law abiding (like you) and what persons are intending harm"

So, criminals are going to obey a sign? Someone "intending harm" won't follow the sign anyways.

"To my knowledge no one has ever had a need to use a firearm inside one of our stores."

So, just because one of their stores has never caught on fire, they should remove all fire extinguishers from the stores? right....

mattwestm said:

"but if we allow firearms inside our stores, there is no way that we can decide, nationwide, what visitors in our stores are law abiding (like you) and what persons are intending harm"

So, criminals are going to obey a sign? Someone "intending harm" won't follow the sign anyways.

"To my knowledge no one has ever had a need to use a firearm inside one of our stores."

So, just because one of their stores has never caught on fire, they should remove all fire extinguishers from the stores? right....

Click to expand...

Their email was total nonsense, typical corporate-speak.

I sense a little confusion in her email, especially with things like this statement:

"We respect the entire United States Constitution, including the Second Amendment which only relates to state action."

Click to expand...

Heh? I wonder what she means by "...which only relates to state action"?

Anyway, it's clear they don't want guns in their stores. Their reasons may seem infantile and slightly hilarious, but it does show that they feel that by simply producing a policy banning guns from their stores, criminals will also comply and leave their guns in their cars while robbing the place.

It's enough for me not to feel safe going there.

Link to form letter

Here is a form letter with a video clip I put together. It is worded for CC but can easily edited for OC.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?92591-Form-letter-to-send-to-non-friendly-2A-businesses

Am I making sense?

I am a Citizen of the United States of America and the Second Amendment affords me the right to openly carry a fire arm. True statement about me.

I am a resident of North Carolina and my State’s Constitution allows me to openly carry a fire arm, except as prohibited by Law. True statement about me.


Where does it say that employees of any company can make the Law?

If I walked into a store and the person that owned that store said, sign or not, you can not enter my store “carrying that gun”, I would leave and respect his choice about his property.

Sam Ash has its headquarters in New York, its customer service in FL and the tax maps state the "owner" of 3131 Capital Blvd is in Atlanta. I can guarantee that Sam Ash do not own the building or the land underneath it on Capital Blvd…

If whoever owns Sam Ash has a policy, I understand. On the other hand for employees and managers to dictate company policy and Our Rights without consent of the owner… that does not sound right to me.

asg

rotorhead said:

I sense a little confusion in her email, especially with things like this statement:



Heh? I wonder what she means by "...which only relates to state action"?

Anyway, it's clear they don't want guns in their stores. Their reasons may seem infantile and slightly hilarious, but it does show that they feel that by simply producing a policy banning guns from their stores, criminals will also comply and leave their guns in their cars while robbing the place.

It's enough for me not to feel safe going there.

Click to expand...

I believe they are trying to point to the collective rights model which is about the right being for states to have militia and that the second amendment is not for individual rights. Unfortunately they are forgetting that in United States v. Emerson, Columbia v. Heller, and in McDonald v. Chicago the Supreme Court ruled otherwise and that it IS an individual right.

Must be the New York people that added that bit...

just wondering

So I was wondering if you tried just walking in and doing your business. For the most part those signs are up for legal purposes in case some some without good intent starts trouble, or something happens and the gun goes off they can say we had it posted and the carrier chose not to abide . I do believe in unrestricted right to carry . At the same time I respect personal property laws and their free and clear right to do with what they want with their property .

I own and carry and have seen the idiotic things people can do with a loaded gun.
Not everything is a crusade , walk in and do what you need to do and if you are approached and asked to leave deal with it then.

There is an OC friendly music store in Smithfield. They're no Guitar Center or Sam Ash, but I like to think they're pretty good. Heck, I spend 40 hours a week there.